January 25, 201016 yr The sudden death overtime? This is starting to get a little out of hand that the team that wins the toss is the "better" team. This game could have been a thousand times better than it already was if they went by the college rules. Not saying the better team didnt win, but the Vkes didnt even have a chance to prove themselves which has been the case twice so far (Pack/Cards).
January 25, 201016 yr Author Never. What are your feelings? Not calling you out or anything but I just want to know where other BGP's stand on this. I think this game could have went the way of the OSU vs MIA game had the rules allowed it.
January 25, 201016 yr They shouldn't. To win in overtime consistently you had better have a good offense and a good defense. If your defense can't stop a team going down for a game winning drive then maybe you shouldn't be in the Super Bowl.
January 25, 201016 yr What are your feelings? Not calling you out or anything but I just want to know where other BGP's stand on this. I think this game could have went the way of the OSU vs MIA game had the rules allowed it. I really don't care either way. It obviously favors the offense, but there are plenty of time where both teams get possessions.
January 25, 201016 yr I don't really like the college method either. Play for another period of time (15 min or shorter).
January 25, 201016 yr Author I guess I see both point of views, but in games such as this where neither team is really stoping the other why should the team that lost the toss be punished? I'm about 99% sure that if Minn would have won that toss they would have won the game just as the Saints did. I just think it should be left on the field not the flip of a coin.
January 25, 201016 yr Author They shouldn't. To win in overtime consistently you had better have a good offense and a good defense. If your defense can't stop a team going down for a game winning drive then maybe you shouldn't be in the Super Bowl. The Saints couldnt stop the Vikes on their last two drives, but the Vikes stopped the Saints. How do explain that? It was in regulation but it was still stops.
January 25, 201016 yr We have all been robbed, both teams should have equal opportunity in the OT period.
January 25, 201016 yr The Saints couldnt stop the Vikes on their last two drives, but the Vikes stopped the Saints. How do explain that? It was in regulation but it was still stops. If the Vikings would have gotten the ball and scored the Saints could not have cried either. It's a team game. Sometimes the offense has to make plays and sometimes the defense has to make a play. Stop someone or don't cry about it IMO.
January 25, 201016 yr I have always felt that each team should get at least one offensive possession. If the receiving team scores on the opening drive, the kicking team should get an offensive series. Once both teams have had an offensive possession, first team to score wins.
January 25, 201016 yr I hate NFL OT. I'd rather see opposing kickers stand at each end of the endzone and sprint a 100 yard dash for the win than to see the team who wins a coin toss kick a FG and win. Either end sudden death or make it where only a TD can win the game or give both teams a chance at the end.
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.